Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a contractual clause requiring a demand for arbitration within 90 days of intimation that the final bill was ready for payment, and extinguishing the contractor's claim on expiry of that period, was hit by section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and whether the award holding the claim time-barred could be sustained.
Analysis: The contractual stipulation made the contractor's claim cease after the expiry of a specified period and operated to discharge the employer from liability in respect of such claim. Such a term restricted the enforcement of contractual rights and fell within the prohibition contained in section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Since the arbitrator rejected the claims only on the ground of limitation arising from that clause, the claims were not examined on merits.
Conclusion: The clause could not be enforced to defeat the claim, and the award based on that clause was liable to be set aside. The objections were allowed and the matter was remitted for decision on merits by the arbitrator or a substitute arbitrator, if necessary.
Final Conclusion: The arbitral award could not stand because it rested on an unenforceable contractual time-bar, and the dispute was sent back for adjudication on merits.
Ratio Decidendi: A contractual term that extinguishes a party's rights or discharges the other party's liability on expiry of a specified period, so as to prevent enforcement of contractual rights, is void under section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.